I watched a Utube vid last night on a French crewed Sherman that had taken a hit to the front of the turret by an 88mm it was nasty as can be.
I am not going to post the link as it is very graphic in content an in respect of the two crew members that perished when the A.P round got inside the turret, they had to get them out.
A chap wrote a book on the Sherman and its flaws and really to sum it up it went sorta like Patton wanted a medium fast tank the essence was in speed and more speed to exploit.....
He then goes on to say the early 75mm guns we pretty useless past 600m against the Tiger and Panther even then it had to be a flank attack. Whereas the former could take out a Sherman at 2000m. There must be a reason why the thought pattern was on that route as to send troops in with inferior gear is criminal, was it to shorten the war by flooding the defenses! All I feel is empathy for those poor tankers knowingly going in against German armor and realizing their survivability was pretty much zero if the A.P did not get you the resultant fire would. This is why I cherish each day of the Western worlds freedom which allows me to do this to understand by the bravery of those poor fellows
But I will post this link; https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&r...jaATaSpD4WSAZg
Information
Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.
The allies including the Soviets had the numbers in terms of armor in the field. Soviet armor lost 3-1 on the eastern front and were able to grind down the Panzers. The US and British air attacks crippled German armor and parts replacement factories. Many German Panzers were not destroyed by fire and were abandoned due to mechanical failure or simply ran out of fuel.
The German 88 mm (8.8 cm) including all variants and the Panther 75 mm (7.5 cm) guns could defeat any armor fielded by the allies. Panzer ace Michael Wittman's Tiger alone knocked out an entire bunched-up British column close to 30 armor and vehicles on a raised road. The Tiger knocked out the lead tank and then the rear vehicle. The rest was a turkey shoot.
They always targeted the Firefly first the SU series was a threat but not having a turret was an ambush weapon but still a force to be reckoned with Wittmann was shot up the flank by a Firefly, Michael's handling of the Villier Bocage turkey shoot could show what a well led troop of Tiger tanks could do. In this encounter Pat Dias commander of an M-4 (British crewed) came across Wittmann and thinking the tiger had missed him reversed into a building to let the tiger by and then track out and flank shoot the tiger.
All went well the Tiger trundled past and Pat trundled out of the lair for what he thought would be easy pickings as that killer gun would be on the on the other end, it was a grand plan except when pats M-4 came out he met Wittmann's tiger head on as he had seen Pat's tank and merely carried out his own rouse which Pat said did not do much for your constitution go head to head in a M-4 Sherman facing a Tiger at 75m range.
In Pats words 'We fired twice and the shots just bounced off.........: he fired once which did not bounce off, it blew Pat out of the turret and killed two of his crew, Pat was badly injured and the doctor at the beach head aid station was an eye specialist he passed a great big magnet in front of Pat's eyes causing all the steel splinters come out as if they stayed there 24 hours Pat would have been blind. Pat Dias admired Wittmmann he was ruthless, a great tank leader and a master tactician, there were only @1300+ of all marks of Tiger tanks they killed out of all proportions in some cases in the east the ratio was 36 T34's/1 Tiger loss
Posted this a few time before when discussion threads around Sherman Tanks get posted ..
Don't own one, but spent a LOT of time in the M4A2E8 Sherman ....
Brings back memories ....
Here's some 40+ year old pics from my very first day on the tank ranges as a fresh young Crew Commander. Two of my first few engagements (different tanks) at 1,500 to 2,800 yards were captured in the color pics below. What the second one didn't show was the result of the 76mm back blast spinning me around in the turret, blowing my beret off my head and over the back deck, plus burning (singe effect) my eyebrows and hair bad enough that it crumbled to the touch. Of course, I straightened myself up and tried to look "very cool" to all of my buddies watching.
As a crew member did you feel confident you had an effective weapon compared to potential enemies? I'd be curious also, did the Sherman E8 have any quirks that aren't well known?
the result of the 76mm back blast spinning me around in the turret, blowing my beret off my head and over the back deck, plus burning (singe effect) my eyebrows and hair bad enough that it crumbled to the touch.
Some of the things you take for granted and the Sherman was certainly always one of those in my book.
They filmed FURY just up the road from where I am, and it was then that I realised the tight operating area inside for the crew, and what that must have been like when a TIGER was spotted. The panic that must have gone through that space must have been horrendous.
It was only when the 88mm gun was fitted did the Sherman really hold its own, but what a marvellous tank. If you haven't see FURY yet...........highly recommended to fully understand how brave these crews were
'Tonight my men and I have been through hell and back again, but the look on your faces when we let you out of the hall - we'd do it all again tomorrow.' Major Chris Keeble's words to Goose Green villagers on 29th May 1982 - 2 PARA
It's not fair to say the M-4 Sherman was inferior because it was not the equal of a German Tiger tank in 1 to 1 combat. The Sherman was not designed for anti-tank warfare, it was designed to be highly mobile, very reliable, and excellent support for infantry operations. It could be produced in mass production (nearly 30,000 produced in 1943), loaded on transport ships to cross the Atlantic, and reliable in the field with a great V-8 engine.
While the Shermans charged on with better range and mobility than their opponents, the Tigers were strong on firepower and armour, but lacking in mobility and too many were broken down, unable to perform. It's like a sports team that has heavy duty players who are out of condition and injured.
A Tiger could travel 60 miles on 150 gallons of gas, compared to the Sherman's range of 120 miles on 175 gallons. In a race car competition, the Tiger would be in the pits refueling twice as many times as a Sherman.
And the Tiger weighed in a whopping 68.5 tonnes, compared to less than half that for the Sherman. It meant that may Tigers couldn't cross many bridges in Europe, having to take alternative routes. For its limits, history proved the Sherman to be the better choice.
Last edited by Seaspriter; 10-29-2015 at 08:22 AM.
crewed Sherman that had taken a hit to the front of the turret by an 88mm it was nasty as can be.
PM
Originally Posted by Badger
